I genuinely do not know what to believe about anthropogenic global warming. But I do know that there is so much scientific uncertainty in the matter that any layperson who claims to have resolved it absolutely is pure bluster. And I know also that there are hugely different costs associated with different errors in inference. If CO2 emissions are in fact causing global warming, and we do nothing about them, then the cost of the error is astounding. If the emissions are not responsible for global warming, and we reduce them needlessly, the cost of the error is relatively low. Given the present scientific uncertainty, and the possibility that severe cost is associated with allowing CO2 emissions to rise, a prudent course would be to look for approaches to reducing emissions that are a) relatively high in efficacy and b) relatively low in impact on the economy.

In case anyone is wondering where 30 comments disappeared to they can be found at www.offtopicpurgatory.org.

Says carlsonjok: "I would note that the comments that were deleted were all the comments discussing Sal's dishonest use of the Darwin puppy quote. Sal's original comment is still there, though. You are one classy guy, Dave.

--------------Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."- David Foster Wallace

"Hereâ€™s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."- Barry Arrington

In case anyone is wondering where 30 comments disappeared to they can be found at www.offtopicpurgatory.org.

Says carlsonjok: "I would note that the comments that were deleted were all the comments discussing Sal's dishonest use of the Darwin puppy quote. Sal's original comment is still there, though. You are one classy guy, Dave.

Dave lifts the intelligence of fools to new levels

....but even by his own metric, that is still below an average IQ of a 17 yr old (av. age of SAT test candidate) with a 23 year old's brain (IQ approx 140-150).......when sat* by a semi college educated marine dork who is actually .....23 years old.

*as in dT taking a 17 year old's SAT test at 23 years old, when he is ready for the knackery.

"Do we need to know whether or not the mountains of Rushmore were designed or not in order to reach a design inference for the faces carved into them? No. Only the difference in specified complexity between the old and new patterns need be examined."

ID is so awesome. It is a science that does no lab or field work and relies on mathematical concepts that use no mathematical calculations. It reminds me of the Todd Snider song about the band that wouldn’t play a note.

"Do we need to know whether or not the mountains of Rushmore were designed or not in order to reach a design inference for the faces carved into them? No. Only the difference in specified complexity between the old and new patterns need be examined."

ID is so awesome. It is a science that does no lab or field work and relies on mathematical concepts that use no mathematical calculations. It reminds me of the Todd Snider song about the band that wouldn’t play a note.

Several people have remarked that, while never formally banned, their comments simply stopped appearing on UD. If that happened to you, then PM me with the details. After conducting a thorough background check*, I'll include you in a compilation of similar unknown soldiers. If you otherwise don't find yourself in my compilation, let me know.

* Sent me a PM? Yes. Cleared.

--------------Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."- David Foster Wallace

"Hereâ€™s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."- Barry Arrington

Several people have remarked that, while never formally banned, their comments simply stopped appearing on UD. If that happened to you, then PM me with the details. After conducting a thorough background check*, I'll include you in a compilation of similar unknown soldiers. If you otherwise don't find yourself in my compilation, let me know.

* Sent me a PM? Yes. Cleared.

I'm not one of the banned, but I am just disgusted by the total infantile puerile amoral behavior of these cretinous yahoos.

They can't even openly ban posters.

My opinion of fundieshits is only confirmed by their behavior: By their fruits ye shall know (Matthew 7:16)

--------------"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

The offending comment is gone, so I've no idea what he did. But this is quite an honour. Bannination by the witch, not just the flying monkey.

I saw it. Uthan's comment was something to the effect that Google Scholar had over 2 million hits on evolution and only 14 thousand for intelligent design. An interesting comparison made more interesting by someone pointing out the danger of assuming Google hits equate to legitimacy.

Quote

Google hits has nothing to do with the legitimacy of a science. Consider that Time Cube has approximately 75,000 google results.

--------------It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

I saw it. Uthan's comment was something to the effect that Google Scholar had over 2 million hits on evolution and only 14 thousand for intelligent design. An interesting comparison made more interesting by someone pointing out the danger of assuming Google hits equate to legitimacy.

Quote

Google hits has nothing to do with the legitimacy of a science. Consider that Time Cube has approximately 75,000 google results.

Thirdly, I will ask the question whether it is theologically warranted to conclude that the intelligent designer of ID can be the God of Christian theology. In other words, one can ask whether believers should want the designer of ID to be the God they worship. I doubt whether that is the case, by describing Karl Barth’s Kant’s inspired criticism of natural theology. I conclude that ID is an example of ‘the domestication of transcendence’, and that theologians should reject ID as a theological illusion, built to blind the faithful.

That was from one of the papers submitted, Taede SmedesCatholic University of Louvain

To cut to the chase, our best instruments can only measure out to 400 light-years using triangulation. Anything beyond that is a guess.

This is interesting. According to Wikipedia the distance to SN1987A has been measured by triangulation. The figure obtained is 168,000 light years.

Quote

The three bright rings around SN 1987A are material from the stellar wind of the progenitor. These rings were ionized by the ultraviolet flash from the supernova explosion, and consequently began emitting in various emission lines. These rings did not “turn on” until several months after the supernova, and the turn-on process can be very accurately studied through spectroscopy. The rings are large enough for their angular size to be measured accurately: the inner ring is 0.808 arcseconds in radius. Using the distance light must have traveled to light up the inner ring as the base of a right angle triangle, and the angular size as seen from the Earth for the local angle, one can use basic trigonometry to calculate the distance to SN1987A, which is about 168,000 light-years

Will you be giving up your YEC leanings now as this data appears to directly disconfirm your theory that the cosmos can be young?

Not being an uneducated tard, he just didn't 'fit in'.

--------------"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

Using the distance light must have traveled to light up the inner ring as the base of a right angle triangle, and the angular size as seen from the Earth for the local angle, one can use basic trigonometry to calculate the distance to SN1987A, which is about 168,000 light-years

Interesting number. 168,000 happens to be the speed of light in miles per second. Dr. Dr. D should pounce on this as the True signature of the Designer. What are the odds that this cosmic number should be expressed in earth years and English units, unless God is an Englishman?

--------------Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.